Petitioners not to oppose Dalmiya's bail plea

The Indian board and the the state of Maharashtra told the Supreme Court today that they were not opposed to the anticipatory bail granted to Jagmohan Dalmiya, the former BCCI president, in the case regarding misappropriation of funds related to the 1996 World Cup.

The state of Maharashtra, which had challenged the anticipatory bail granted to Dalmiya, changed its stance after a bench of Justice SB Sinha and Justice PK Balasubramanyan observed that "it was a problem of vindictiveness".

However, the court issued notices to Dalmiya, SK Nair, former BCCI secretary, and treasurers Kishore Rungta and Jyoti Bajpai, on Maharashtra's Special Leave Petition as Harish Salve, senior counsel appearing for the state, said he wanted certain observations made in the Bombay High Court order expunged. Salve said that the high court's observations on the merits of the case amounted to saying there was no case against Dalmiya and the others.

When initially L Nageshwar Rao, the board's counsel, opposed the anticipatory bail granted to Dalmiya, the court said "BCCI is only a complainant in the case. It has no locus standi... This is too much...", following which Rao retracted his earlier position.

On behalf of Dalmiya, senior counsel Soli J Sorabjee submitted it was a case of vindictiveness and nothing else and the court should record it in its order.

Salve submitted certain documents relating to the case in the court for perusal. However, when Sorabjee asked for a copy of the same, he refused to part with them saying he cannot share it with the accused as the investigation was still going on.